SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Wakeel Ahamad And 8 Others vs State Of U.P. on 16 November, 2019


?Court No. – 88

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. – 50010 of 2019

Applicant :- Wakeel Ahamad And 8 Others

Opposite Party :- State of U.P.

Counsel for Applicant :- Perdeep Kumar Vishnoi

Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

Hon’ble Pradeep Kumar Srivastava,J.

Heard Sri Pradeep Kumar Vishnoi, learned counsel for the applicants, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

The present anticipatory bail application has been filed by the applicants Wakeel Ahmad, Nafees Ahmad, Smt. Parveen, Sameer, Nazuk, Tamanna, Tabassum, Raies and Rasihid with a prayer to enlarge them on anticipatory bail in Case Crime No. 16 of 2019, under Sections 498A, Section323, Section504, Section506, Section377, Section376 I.P.C. and Section 3/Section4 Dowry Prohibition Act, Police Station Mahila Thana, District Amroha (Jeotiba Phule Nagar).

A first information report has been lodged by the victim who happens to be the wife of applicant no. 1 alleging that applicant no. 1 has committed unnatural sex with her and applicant no. 9 namely Rasihid has committed rape on her. Remaining applicants have been assigned supporting role, who are father-in-law, mother-in-law, devar, nanad, and jeth against who no allegation of unnatural rape has been made in the first information report.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that the applicants have been falsely implicated in the present case. Applicants no. 2 to 8 are relatives and they have not committed any unnatural offence of rape on the victim. The specific allegations of unnatural rape has been made against the applicant no. 1 namely Wakeel Ahmad and applicant no. 9 namely Rasihid. There is every possibility that if anticipatory bail is not granted, the applicants shall be arrested in such a false case. The applicants will participate and cooperate with the investigation. The matter is triable by the Magistrate. The matter needs deeper and fairer investigation before any arrest should be given effect to.

Learned A.G.A. has opposed the prayer for anticipatory.

Keeping in view the reasons as stated above, the facts and circumstances of the case without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, considering the nature of accusation, only applicants no. 2 to 8 namely Nafees Ahmad, Smt. Parveen, Sameer, Nazuk, Tamanna, Tabassum and Raies are entitled to be released on anticipatory bail till filing of the charge sheet in this case.

In the event of arrest of the applicants Nafees Ahmad, Smt. Parveen, Sameer, Nazuk, Tamanna, Tabassum and Raies involved in the aforesaid case shall be released on anticipatory bail on their furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Station House Officer of the police station concerned with the following conditions:-

(i) the applicants will join and participate in each and every aspect of “Investigation” and will lend full assistance to the Investigating Agency even with regard to “discovery of fact” if and when required so by the Investigating Agency or the concerned court;

(ii) the applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;

iii) the applicants shall not directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police office;

(iv) the applicants shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court and if they has passport the same shall be deposited by them before the S.S.P./S.P. Concerned.

In default or misuse of any of the conditions, the Public Prosecutor/Investigating Officer/first informant-complainant is at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

However, the anticipatory bail in respect of applicant no. 1 namely Wakeel Ahamad and applicant no. 9 namely Rasihid are concerned, the same is rejected as specific allegations have been made against them in the first information report.

Bail application is accordingly disposed of.

Order Date :- 16.11.2019




Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2022 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation